IMPACT OF FARICIMAB VERSUS AFLIBERCEPT ON EPIRETINAL MEMBRANE FORMATION OVER 2 YEARS IN PATIENTS WITH DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA IN THE PHASE 3 YOSEMITE AND RHINE TRIALS
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: To assess the effects of faricimab versus aflibercept on epiretinal membrane (ERM) formation in eyes with diabetic macular edema. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of phase 3 YOSEMITE/RHINE trial data in eyes with diabetic macular edema receiving faricimab every 8 weeks (Q8W), faricimab treat-and-extend (T&E; up to Q16W depending on central subfield thickness and best-corrected visual acuity), or aflibercept Q8W for 100 weeks. RESULTS: ERMs developed in 3.8% (23/602) of eyes treated with faricimab Q8W, 5.1% (31/608) with faricimab T&E, and 7.6% (45/590) with aflibercept Q8W at 100 weeks. ERMs were less likely with faricimab Q8W versus aflibercept Q8W (odds ratio [OR] 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-0.81, P = 0.0055). The mean (SD) best-corrected visual acuity at 100 weeks in eyes with and without ERMs were 69.2 (13.6) letters [20/40 Snellen] versus 73.8 (13.1) [20/40 Snellen], respectively; the mean (SD) CSTs were 315.8 (99.2) versus 274.6 (74.1) µ m. Faricimab T&E dosing intervals were extended ≥ Q12W in 79.7% of eyes without ERMs versus 50.0% with ERMs. CONCLUSION: Risk of ERMs was 52% lower with faricimab Q8W versus aflibercept Q8W over 100 weeks in eyes with diabetic macular edema, suggesting a potential role for faricimab in reducing pre-retinal fibrotic proliferation. The results may help inform physician/patient decision-making when initiating intravitreal therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03622580 and NCT03622593.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it